Re: A proposal for draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-07

james woodyatt <jhw@google.com> Fri, 03 March 2017 19:05 UTC

Return-Path: <jhw@google.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A56C412998E for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Mar 2017 11:05:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uJuH91Y0j3t5 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Mar 2017 11:05:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pf0-x232.google.com (mail-pf0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A9E3112998F for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Fri, 3 Mar 2017 11:05:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pf0-x232.google.com with SMTP id e66so17393816pfe.1 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Fri, 03 Mar 2017 11:05:22 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=from:mime-version:subject:date:references:to:in-reply-to:message-id; bh=5HzhOJDgObJG4fY5uOKjN9R7j2dwMrlg1KM+KZd+70Q=; b=FED7qVo92+9k/9ZnyHMXf80QCcf2jKTg1DrrRbk2g/ClCTm+ovktI8I4/2tBtWO7R6 c68nMZuDY8ZuCT+DWD8M+npuLaUMXRVI8WOykvHR7++Np152Gcc8KsUP/ZsQQ0ZZeN8a JWuX9DukTY+ZhxftcDCDxVaMUSMIbmHmLobRQHecCY/zFEw11hlal3RC0aiZJpwnw+Zb 5VB70/ZOy9bVA6VUMxgumWYGSQ5CsbSk1kKyE8WN5f5u0yBCcZDJI/hk/YhBS9JRP5dW ShwDXpXQ+k3R5e4vXhosVwgAHpw3z3vk14EpSuwrkgfN6z+wmq7jolnyuOgbnZ+Ut7+I +CiA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:mime-version:subject:date:references:to :in-reply-to:message-id; bh=5HzhOJDgObJG4fY5uOKjN9R7j2dwMrlg1KM+KZd+70Q=; b=GQPAirsLJLm20ru0tvWN0cUO4l9E53J/hLfDA/0w/+no5i0udNedd3gWk3ZCa7eF1a QP/C6qjMnf7ugS7YSpqMkw9zdZrZizieuoWxvYFqm8+ghXrCLv84WEHB8K8rlP+jAbz7 T0l6eGiQm6BTV9v0gGhq7R5+L4tdGCWNQe/I9pTqg2wNq69UjSp3wtdpYrTEo8yz6D7s EnTjdY4A7lE+EGy2JNIwywZPv3ackn0lxxvMvB76nZRp7UJDNuJd2RCY1E2p1wCUHpsC c5WFKMipHLFDecBVQAXyOFvwf5GQ15sbXjk2X40TjIfXfGDhlnu1oht+lxKDoIAiOPRC kD0g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39mpbXX/1BVYKs5S4Y0rDl/TwLTdDHburVGQmt8OVYcF1BXRTu5k+KWC5C7oEud6cQ9J
X-Received: by 10.99.171.75 with SMTP id k11mr5226514pgp.16.1488567922247; Fri, 03 Mar 2017 11:05:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dhcp-100-99-230-134.pao.corp.google.com ([100.99.230.134]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h17sm24844194pfh.62.2017.03.03.11.05.21 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 03 Mar 2017 11:05:21 -0800 (PST)
From: james woodyatt <jhw@google.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_119AFB0C-BF8F-485C-AD1F-9C0CD2DFFED6"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\))
Subject: Re: A proposal for draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-07
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2017 11:05:20 -0800
References: <CAN-Dau17q_BrUuzfvB1mLDt6p5UxYikphWaHpa8VQ2L-3kx-DA@mail.gmail.com> <96a5dfe9-0122-0f8c-5ad3-f98dc1867f25@gmail.com> <CAN-Dau3rKf1vqb3Fb7emJ75iJ+nTC-Vu=Ude--A0bDV-P8Bcpg@mail.gmail.com> <99749605-50a7-0920-9ace-2c0278efc750@gmail.com> <CA94CBB8-115E-4842-8F38-EA58DF5104E8@google.com> <101927d0-7b76-ce96-29e4-57b63297bb9f@gmail.com>
To: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <101927d0-7b76-ce96-29e4-57b63297bb9f@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <B60A64C5-15D5-4E72-9745-C318872AB6D2@google.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/9KXzRp4GxA-gNG-YFu28xzQnvAc>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2017 19:05:23 -0000

On Mar 3, 2017, at 10:14, Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>; wrote:
> Le 03/03/2017 à 19:12, james woodyatt a écrit :
>> On Mar 3, 2017, at 02:28, Alexandre Petrescu
>> <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com <mailto:alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> So one wonders why64?  One source is this EUI-64 originated at IEEE.
>>> Then 'Modified' EUI-64 at IETF.  Yet EUI-64 is no longer. It was
>>> designed to replace 48bit MACs.  It did not succeed: we dont see
>>> 'EUI-64' on Ethernet-based devices, we continue to see 48bit MAC
>>> addresses even on non-Ethernet devices.  But we hear about EUI-128,
>>> which would obviously couldnt work with IPv6.
>> 
>> IEEE 802.15.4 is not remotely dead, and it uses EUI-64, not EUI-48.
> 
> But do I see "EUI-64" printed on some 802.15.4 device?  Or do I see a 48bit MAC address?


The MAC address printed on IEEE 802.15.4 devices are 64 bits not 48 bits.


--james woodyatt <jhw@google.com <mailto:jhw@google.com>>